The spammers have discovered twitter I see. Hang in there.

dr.e

Agreed that these guerilla marketing ploys should be kept off the site a) because, despite our disagreement on some sexual issues, I do draw the line at children as you rightly point out, and b) because it devalues TMV's ad space to allow the Reactions section, or the comment section, to be used for commercial solicitation purposes.

We cannot view TMV with children present anymore? Have the “Sexually Oriented” taken over the Normally Oriented world now?

Get these disgusting pigs off the blog!

I don't have a problem with same-sex marriage and generally support it, although I'm not going to go marching in the streets for it.

I was responding to tidbits assertion that marriage is not the government's business. It IS their business, and people seeking legal recognition of gay marriage realize it is the government's business. Personally I think splitting marriage into a religious sacrament recognized by the church and a civil contract recognized by the government would make sense, but right now it's all kind of jumbled together.

On Rove, of course his divorce is a matter of public record and if people want to criticize it then more power to them, but really this is 99% partisan finger-pointing and 1% any real concern over Rove's actions. Rove is pretty much irrelevant at this point anyway. Partisans consider hypocrisy the greatest sin of all, except when they commit it themselves.

If marriages and divorces are public actions, then Dana Perino was wrong, both factually and morally, to request that people “respect” the Rove family's “privacy.”

What *I* don't understand is why this is such a difficult concept to grasp, even for people who at least nominally support marriage equality. One shouldn't *have* to be gay or lesbian to grasp it. Every decent human being should be able to understand this. I am not gay, and I feel it on a visceral level. I don't think I'm so extraordinarily different from anyone else in my ability to feel.

Oh, bullpucky!

Marriage is a religious sacrament that government butted into about 150 years ago as a fundraising device (charging fees for the issuance of marriage licenses). Issues of taxation, estates, or division of assets can be accomplished by recognizing households (taxation) and implied contracts (estates and division of assets). Powers of Attorney are strictly based on contractual documents. None of these functions requires a governmental definition of marriage.

Just my dumb opinion. Whether you partner up gay, straight or other is about as much the government's business as whether you start your day with coffee, tea or Red Bull.

I agree who people decide to have sex with or consort with is no one else's business but the people involved. Marriage is a little different since it is a public contract asking for legal governmental recognition, and has a bearing on taxation, estates, power of attorney, etc, etc. As such the government should be able to define under what parameters it considers marriage.

Happy New Year to all…regardless of who you partner with and regardless of what form that partnership takes.

g. c.

In any event the left making hay out of Rove's divorce is really just sinking to Rove's level.

Where is that jackass John Bolton these days? Anybody keeping tabs on him? Can't wait to see his reputation dragged through the mud.